ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03846661Updated Feb 27, 2019

Nationwide Long-term Outcome Surveillance of Physiomesh® vs. Other Meshes in Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia Repair

An interventional study of Physiomesh in Hernia, Abdominal, Recurrence and Postoperative Complications, sponsored by Zealand University Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 100 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-02-27.

Sponsored by Zealand University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 9 years 1 month after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2010, registered Feb 2019).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
3,338
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years to 100 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The primary aim of the present study was to show how a national clinical register combined with other nationwide administrative registers may serve as a tool for pre- and post-marketing evaluation of new mesh and mesh fixation products for hernia surgery, using Physiomesh® versus other meshes designed for laparoscopic hernia repair as an example.

Read the detailed description

All adult (≥18 yrs) patients registered in the Danish Hernia Database (DHB) who underwent elective primary laparoscopic incisional hernia repair between January 1st 2010 and December 31st 2016.

To obtain 100% follow-up data from DHB will be combined with administrative data from the Danish National Patient register.

Patients will be followed from initial hernia repair until reoperation for recurrence, death, emigration outside Denmark or end of follow-up (november 2017).

Physiomesh and other mesh repairs will be propensity score matched. Each patient in the Physiomesh® group will be matched with two patients treated with one of the other synthetic meshes. The Propensity score includes age, sex, year of surgery, diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diagnosis of diabetes, diagnosis of obesity, Charlson comorbidity index and size of hernia defect

The primary outcome: Difference in risk for a reoperation for recurrence between patients operated with Physiomesh® and patients operated with another synthetic mesh designed for laparoscopic repair.

The secondary outcome will be rates of 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation for complications (excluding hernia recurrence) as well as 30- and 90-day mortality.

02

Conditions studied

  • Hernia, Abdominal
  • Recurrence
  • Postoperative Complications
03

In context

Hernia, Abdominal

82 studies on the registry are indexed under Hernia, Abdominal; 19 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 3,338 is above the median of 90 across 48 interventional studies indexed under Hernia, Abdominal.

Browse Hernia, Abdominal studies →

Lead sponsor

Zealand University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 236 studies on the registry; 50 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 100 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • All patients registered in the Danish Hernia Database for a laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • If not registered for a laparoscopic incisional hernia repair in the Danish Hernia Database
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
3,338 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Physiomesh

    Patients undergoing laparoscopic incisional hernia repair reinforced with a Physiomesh.

    Device: Physiomesh

  • No intervention
    other mesh

    Patients undergoing laparoscopic incisional hernia repair reinforced with other meshes than Physiomesh.

Interventions

  • DevicePhysiomesh

    difference in risk for recurrence and postoperative complication

    Also known as: other mesh

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Re-operation for recurrence rate

    Time frame: up to 84 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. 30-day readmission rate

    Time frame: 30 day

  2. 30-reoperation for complication rate

    Time frame: 30 day

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Dept. of surgery, Zealand University Hospital
    Køge, 4600, Denmark
08

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Jan 2010 to primary completion in Nov 2017, 94 months.

Of 31 interventional studies with no phase under Hernia, Abdominal, half reached primary completion within 31 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 60. This study's 94 months is above that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 4, 2019
First posted
Feb 20, 2019
StartActual
Jan 1, 2010
Primary completionActual
Nov 1, 2017
CompletionActual
Feb 1, 2019
Last update
Feb 27, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 27, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03846661
Responsible party
Frederik Helgstrand (Principal Investigator, Zealand University Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Feb 20, 2019
Start date
Jan 1, 2010
Primary completion
Nov 1, 2017
Completion
Feb 1, 2019
Last update
Feb 27, 2019

Study contacts

Frederik Helgstrand, MD
principal investigator · Dept. Surgery, Zealand university Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion